Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021
Barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia-Qualitative findings from the intervention group of a randomised-controlled trial.
Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-ethnography of shared decision-making in mental health care from the perspective of staff and service users.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia-Qualitative findings from the intervention group of a randomised-controlled trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Trial
- Development and Preliminary Validation of a Tool to Assess Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Switch Trials.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Psychiatric nurses' understandings and attitudes toward the participation of patients with mental disorders in shared decision-making: a phenomenological study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Bridging the Gap Between Efficacy and Practice: A Systematic Review of Shared Decision-Making in Severe Mental Illness.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Review
- From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living with Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2025Review
- Shared Decision-Making Tools Implemented in the Electronic Health Record: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Path Analysis of Health Literacy, Social Support, and Self-Efficacy on Decisional Conflict in Patients with Stable Schizophrenia.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2024Article
- How can we improve the care of patients with schizophrenia in the real-world? A population-based cohort study of 456,003 patients.Molecular psychiatry · 2023Article
- Evidence-based Shared-Decision-Making Assistant (SDM-assistant) for choosing antipsychotics: protocol of a cluster-randomized trial in hospitalized patients with schizophrenia.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShared decision making (SDM) is appreciated as a promising model of communication between clinicians and patients. However, in acute mental health settings, its implementation is still unsatisfactory.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to examine barriers and facilitators of SDM with acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia.
designA qualitative interview study was performed. SETTING AND
participantsThe analysis is based on interviews with participants (patients and staff members) of the intervention group of the randomised-controlled SDM MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: Interviews addressed treatment decisions made during the current inpatient stay. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsA total of 40 interviews were analysed and 131 treatment decisions were identified. According to the interviewees, SDM had taken place in 29% of the decisions, whereas 59% of the decisions were made without SDM. In 16%, a clear judgement could not be made. Barriers and facilitators of SDM were categorised into patient factors, clinician factors, setting factors and others. Clinicians mostly reported patient factors (e.g., symptoms) as barriers towards SDM, which were not mirrored on the patients' side. Facilitators included patient as well as clinician behaviour during consultations.
conclusionEven in the context of a successful SDM intervention, the implementation of SDM for patients in the very acute stages of schizophrenia is often not possible. However, strong facilitators for SDM have also been identified, which should be used for further implementation of SDM. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: During the development of the study protocol, meetings with user representatives were held.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.